Re: Dancerboy – Yeah, Gaga and her entire PR team have trained the little monkeys, I mean monsters well - to always keep that hack's name in circulation. Always comparing that 2010 hack to Madonna. Look up Die Another Day, X Static Process Installation, etc. Face it, without parasitically attaching her name to Madonna's, Gaga is nothing more than a one album wonder, from 2010.

Re: FauxNews – Are you kidding? You idiot MADonnites are chomping at the bit to make ridiculous comparisons to LAdy Gaga at every turn. So don't be surprised when they call out MADonna for being (gasp) unoriginal!

Re: tbone0726 – How is Madonna being unoriginal? Are Jails suddenly copyrighted to Gaga? In THAT CASE, Telephone is a copy of Madonnas Whose That Girls and Like a Prayer, both of which included jail based scenarios.

Re: tbone0726 – No, moron! It's the other way around. Face it, it's true…one album wonder. The only reason her name has been in circulation for the past 3 years is because of the Madonna comparisons. And, of course, the others she's ripped off. We are not trying to make the comparisons, the troll of the music industry does that on her own…and purposely. I'm sorry you're too stupid to understand the troll-like PR behavior of this New York version of Paris Hilton and her desire to be Madonna.

Re: FauxNews – Spare everyone your diatribe, FauxIntelligence. Madonna never had an ounce of originality. If Lady Gaga is trying to be Madonna, it's only because she's copying the original and biggest thief of ideas. Sorry that you're just too ignorant of pop culture to understand.

I'll explain it in a way that you can (hopefully) understand. Madonna's visual inspirations from hollywoods golden era come from a completly different place in the pop culture realm. Marilyn Monroe, Bette Davies, and OH SO many others. You see darling, There's a massibe difference in paying homage to someone than there is "copying" someone.

Let me break it down simply. Lets say the song material girl never got a video. The song would still exist and stand on it's own or lets say that vogue was inspired by Marie antionette - the song would still exist and kick a**.

Now let's take lady gaga. BTW not only copies the visual elements of Madonna but the music is the same with Karl Beans Lyrics.

Lets take Alejandro, the imagery is related to Madonna's like a prayer and Xtatic - process art instillation. Lady gaga's music does not stand on it's own.

When Madonna chanelled Marilyn for example on Material girl, Marilyn's image was the typical bimbo gold digger and in the clip, Madonna fell for the POOR man. - That's the essence of pop art: taking a popular image/concept and changing it.

Lady gaga does brings nothing new to the table. Madonna's "DNA" is in EVERYTHING she does and the worst part of it all is that they are contempories, in the same charts.

You'll need to come to terms with the fact of life that lady gaga is not only a seriel plagarist but a pathological liar.

Re: Chris Tanasoff – I even love it when these self-proclaimed "educated" people assume to know what I was referring to. Sorry, but I wasn't referring to her tacky Marilyn impersonations, but I love how you Stans use that as your standby retort to incorrectly define homage or defend her against allegations of copying. No, I was talking about the years of ripping off other artists, and then allowing her fans to pretend she's the first one to do it. See, all Madonna ever did was take everything everyone else did before her and appropriate it into a K-Mart context. No, dear, the difference between Madonna and Gaga is Madonna had the luxury of not having social media to call her out for being unoriginal. There was no Internet, no YouTube, nothing where people could easily show how she easily copied someone else, but those of us old enough to remember Madonna's entire career and educated about the underground and obscure artists knew.

Re: Chris Tanasoff –
(continued)
And It just wasn't what someone else did before. It was the systematic ripping off and plagiarizing other people's work and getting sued or paying hush money to keep them quiet, or knowing full well those she ripped off would never do anything because she had more power in the industry. Those of US who have been involved and worked in the industry (I'm assuming you haven't ) know about the Queen of Plagiarism and her team's shady practices. That's your problem: you assume I know too little when you don't know anything at all or about me. Apparently you've been drinking the Madonna Koolaid. There's no need to educate me on anything, and I certainly don't need to be educated by some Australian f@g. Besides, you kind of have to sound educated to "school" someone else. Peace!

Re: Chris Tanasoff –
PS. This is my last reply to you, not just not now, but forever. The difference between us is I can be objective. You can't. I can say Madonna has had some brilliant moments. I don't take nothing away from her success, even if she is a thief. But her and Gaga are very much alike (and btw, I'm not fan of Lady G), in that they rely on imagery and media hype to keep going. You say Gaga's music doesn't stand on its own. I beg to differ, and I can name plenty of her songs that do, and I haven't even seen the aforementioned videos from her, but I don't think you really qualify as someone who could factually say that, especially since it's a matter of opinion. Could Madonna's music have survived on its own without her benefiting from the MTV era? It took a gimmicky VMA performance and song to blow her career into the stratosphere, and she always relied on the media-applied term "reinvention."
And your definition of the essence of pop art: nice way to defend mediocrity, but an educated person would never say that.
Tschüß!

"My metabolism actually changed like crazy this year. I have Hashimoto's disease. It's a thyroid disease, and it's now been two years since taking the medication for it, so for the VS show I didn't want to lose any more weight, I just want to have muscles in the right place, and if my butt can get a little perkier, then that's good."